HOW LOW CAN YOU GO? - Bass Trio - TEASER.m4v

HOW LOW CAN YOU GO?! Many people ask themselves this question at many different occasions and in various circumstances. But the answers remained, obscure or at least very vague or even unanswerable in human language. It is known that a group of Sumerian astrologists have been very close to what they considered as an allegory of the deep endlessness they use to stare at but since the Socratic tradition, Plato included, started to question virtually anything, his philosophical successors decided to use the sky or (following the latin translations of the sarcastic Seneca - Icarus' nightmare -) as a reference point for indicating 'high' when expressing utmost positive elevation. Although in Urdu-related cultures in their turn used to interpret the use of this word as 'a deifying state of mindless being due to the sacred smoke of foliage' the invading Arian tribes soon focussed on the concept of 'low' by implementing their perpetual cast system - which in current practice still demonstrates that there will always be people 'below' or 'lower' than you. As a result the question 'how can you go?' lost it's relevance in South East Asian culture during the following centuries and effected the entire continent by the spread of Buddhism. Since the core of Buddha's teachings is to aim enlightenment by revelation and material detachment questioning human issues became an exercise to put live in perspective instead finding answers to earthly questions.
Their are also some early biblical references to the question in question which at the time of the Concile of Nicea was too sophisticated for the bishops who attended the assembly of 325 and by then did a lot of effort to solve the dispute about the nature of the trinity. It was therefore stated as irrelevant for the needs of ordinary believer of the latest of monotheistic trends or those who in the outskirts of the Roman empire had- in their early Christian eyes- had to be converted from their 'silly tree hugging' rituals. Interestingly enough the ritual is still known as 'sitting around the Christmas tree'.
The question was banned from the blueprint texts of either Western as Eastern Christianity and as a result neglected for roughly another 1700 years by philosophy in all it's various branches -in logic, epistemology, and even ethics little attention has been paid. It does however explains why great minds like Thomas Acquinas, Francis Bacon and later during the period of Enlightenment, Jean-Jacques Rousseau but also Kant and Hume never questioned the possibilities of expressions like 'going low' to force a paradigm-change.
One exception off course is Sir Isaac Newton who with his experimental and systematic research to the physical nature of moving objects -among them the ones that fall did a great job for Western understanding of gravity and the mechanics of the universe. Not only would Newton be bypassed by Einstein's Theory of Relativity (lacking any references to what is 'up' or 'down' let alone 'high' or 'low') as soon as he received the courtesy title 'Sir' he started to consider himself as a 'high-class' individual. The commemoration of any flexible use of the idea 'low' disappeared and became narrowly reduced to a single proposition used for social ranking in British class-society. Newton's 'class' soon became outnumbered by the effects of the Industrial Revolution, largely propelled by inventions of his colleague Thomas Jefferson. Needles to say this inspired 19th century philosophical heavyweights as Hegel, Marx and Engels to create political ideas of equality, that can be seen as rudimentary to our Western concept of 'democracy', although some political leaders have claimed or still claim to be more equal then others, viewing the latter as 'lower' then themselves. In Marx theory the laborers position in the 'low' class and the behavior of the bourgeoisie in power rooted in capitalism. According to Marx biographer Vigodsky Vigaly frequent use of the word 'low' as an adjective, not surprisingly in the context of 'income' and 'poor living conditions' - especially his own.
Friedrich Nietzsche is a so called philosophical Einzelganger, reducing any meaning or value to non-existent subject that in case the subject hypothetically is a person, it should at least try to die a heroic dead to give life it's meaning after all. Since 'Low' doesn't have any direct meaning to a living person the term looses it's meaning here.
And still today...whether we speak of Wittgenstein, Heidegger or Fukoyama. None of them have been capable to change the paradigm answering this one single question: How Low can you go??!
We think we are close. We think we are going to find they answer this Wednesday. By making music with three double basses and having a lot fun. Just like that!!!
Hope to see you on Wednesday 6th of June
20.00 h (free entrance)
@jazz café De Badcuyp, in Amsterdam.
Eerste Swelinckstraat 10.

[@zonwuka]

geniale trailer is dit :D

[@doudsbass]

cool james brown cover !